Photo Id To Vote - Voter Suppression Or Election Fraud Prevention?

[RollingJ]

12 minutes ago, GabrielC said:

I think the ID voter idea will lead to an identity card perhaps an way to track people useful information for an government who are keen to hold into power at any price.

Exactly how would that work, please?

 

As @apelikesays above, we already use loyalty cards at many shops/venues, which gives those shops/facilities an idea of our habits - if we choose to use them - but if we do not have them on us at the time, or choose NOT to use them, our shopping habits/use of facility is not recorded. Similarly, if we don't carry an 'identity card' when out, we can't be 'tracked' - and before you say 'Ah, but it will be compulsory' can you prove that?

[GabrielC]

1 minute ago, RollingJ said:

Exactly how would that work, please?

 

As @apelikesays above, we already use loyalty cards at many shops/venues, which gives those shops/facilities an idea of our habits - if we choose to use them - but if we do not have them on us at the time, or choose NOT to use them, our shopping habits/use of facility is not recorded. Similarly, if we don't carry an 'identity card' when out, we can't be 'tracked' - and before you say 'Ah, but it will be compulsory' can you prove that?

If an Policeman stops you in the street he will record the time and the place of were you were stopped. Also countries that have I D cards  it is compulsory to have them all the time when out and about if stopped and don't the card on you then this could see you fined also creating an record. If you are stopped regularly they can build up an picture of your movements. All well and good but I doubt criminals would be happy about it but I suspect the Black Market could make an killing out of knocking out fake ID cards. It may be compulsory or not but theirs to much to gain if it was.

[RollingJ]

1 minute ago, GabrielC said:

If an Policeman stops you in the street he will record the time and the place of were you were stopped. Also countries that have I D cards  it is compulsory to have them all the time when out and about if stopped and don't the card on you then this could see you fined also creating an record. If you are stopped regularly they can build up an picture of your movements. All well and good but I doubt criminals would be happy about it but I suspect the Black Market could make an killing out of knocking out fake ID cards. It may be compulsory or not but theirs to much to gain if it was.

How often do you see a Police officer on foot these days? And yes, if you are stopped for a valid reason, they DO record your identity and the location/reason for the 'stop'.

 

Again, this is all supposition - no-one knows if it  will go ahead, it could all fall apart like Tony Blairs idea did.

[hackey lad]

Would a disabled persons travel pass , with photo , be ok for voter ID ?

[altus]

46 minutes ago, apelike said:

 I have noticed on this very thread arguments that go... "It's going to cost people" and when pointed out its free it changes to "it will stop people from voting"and when that is pointed out that there is no evidence for that happening it changes to "the taxpayer will have to pay for it!

I've noticed on this very thread people studiously avoiding the point, made from the start, that there basically isn't an in person voter fraud problem that this change purports to solve.

[The Joker]

 

4 hours ago, the_bloke said:

I'm sure your fishing to see if I'd agree with being stopped in the street by the Police and asked to 'show my papers' but that isn't what is being proposed.

Then you're either overthinking the question, or you haven't thought it through enough.

3 hours ago, RollingJ said:

He is, and I bet if he didn't one of the other 'ansty' crowd would. 😀

And as for you RollingJ, are you actually capable of independent thought, or do you just simply cheerlead any nonsense that agrees with whatever is going through your head at that very moment?

 

Please don't answer; it is a rhetorical question.

[apelike]

2 hours ago, altus said:

I've noticed on this very thread people studiously avoiding the point, made from the start, that there basically isn't an in person voter fraud problem that this change purports to solve.

But the point is this change is not just about solving any in person voter fraud but also about stopping the future potential for voter fraud and also bringing in a modern up to date system for checking that it does not happen. It also tightens the rules for absent voting and helps prevent voter intimidation. People complain about our old fashioned ways and yet when they attempt to modernise them it is met with dismay. As stated before the system of voter ID is common across the pond and also in Europe so why the big problem with it in the UK. We have many laws that have been introduced simply to help prevent things from happening and this is no exception.

[apelike]

12 minutes ago, CaptainSwing said:

So you were against it when it was proposed by a party you don't like, but are all for it now it's being put forward by one that you do like?

This was talk about a national ID scheme see post #131 and I really don't think the conservative are wanting that as well. I don't think Labour have ever proposed a voter ID scheme either. In any case I have never said I don't like the Labour party and never said I like the conservative party. What I have said is that I am a floating voter and do not hold any allegiance to or are a member of any political party no matter how you wish to spin it in your agenda.

Edited May 16, 2021 by apelike

[RollingJ]

9 hours ago, The Joker said:

 

 

And as for you RollingJ, are you actually capable of independent thought, or do you just simply cheerlead any nonsense that agrees with whatever is going through your head at that very moment?

 

Please don't answer; it is a rhetorical question.

I am going to answer, because (a) I am very capable of independent thought,despite your rather nasty implication to the contrary which I kind of expect from you and (b) you are not always correct, despite the implied assumption that you are.

7 hours ago, CaptainSwing said:

I understood who you were referring to, but I still don't know what you intended by 'ansty'.  Angsty maybe?  Antsy?  Neither of them seems particularly appropriate.  Maybe have a covfefe while you think about it.

 

In any case that was just a bit of light-hearted banter.  The rest of my post was on topic.

 

 

Sorry - yes I did mean 'angsty' , but maybe my brain was a little tired when I made that post. Not that you would be interested, but SF is not my 'natural' go-to forum, I spend most of my online time on a couple of slightly more intelligent forums, and having been busy 'over there' I should have maybe not bothered coming into the playground. BTW - I was drinking coffee at the time I posted.

[The Joker]

 

9 hours ago, apelike said:

As stated before the system of voter ID is common across the pond and also in Europe so why the big problem with it in the UK.

but . . . but . . . but . . . we left the EU because we don't want to follow their instructions.

 

Now thanks to Brexit, not only do we have additional levels of bureaucracy and red tape when dealing with European nations, you're now cheerleading the imposition ID cards.  Just like many European countries have!

 

I wish Brexiters would make their minds up what it is they really want.